RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02362
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO
 
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was separated because he did [sic] pass his test for the security forces course.  He asked to be reclassified or transferred to another branch and was denied (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 May 2001 for a period of four years, in the grade of airman basic (AB/E-1).

On 28 Aug 01, the squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for entry-level performance or conduct.  The reason for the proposed action was that he failed to make satisfactory progress in a required training program.  The applicant was eliminated from the Security Forces technical training course for academic deficiency after failing the first written test twice with scores of 44% and 48%--minimum passing was 70%.  Prior to disenrollment applicant was counseled concerning his academic failure and received four hours of Special Individualized Assistance.  The commander recommended that the applicant be given an entry-level separation.  On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification.  After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.  On 4 Sep 01, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended an entry-level separation.  On 6 Sep 01, the discharge authority approved the entry-level separation.

The applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on 18 September 2001, by reason of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct,” and was issued an RE code of 2C.  He was credited with 2 months and 15 days of active duty service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the application and recommended denial.  They found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted that airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and in accordance with DOD and Air Force instructions.  They further stated that an entry-level separation should not be viewed as negative or less than honorable and should not be confused with other types of separation.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE also reviewed this application and indicated that the RE code of 2C is correct.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Through his congressman, the applicant provided a statement as to the circumstances surrounding his recruitment in the Air Force, his military service and subsequent discharge.  He further explains the conditions surrounding his ability to find a job and getting into college since leaving the service.

Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice concerning the applicant’s RE code.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction.  The RE code which was issued at the time of applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust.  We, therefore, conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

4.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting a change in the reason for separation.  After reviewing the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that some relief is warranted.  We note that the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry level separation; i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be overly harsh.  In our deliberations of this case, it appeared to us that the word “conduct” could be misconstrued to infer that his separation for academic deficiency was also due to misconduct.  While the applicant may have had problems progressing in the required technical training courses, we have seen no evidence of misconduct.  Therefore, in order to correct an injustice of improperly labeling the applicant, his narrative reason for separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the circumstances of his separation.  In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason for separation.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 18 Sep 01.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-02362 in Executive Session on 4 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Jul 02. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Aug 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Oct 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 02.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant’s Congressman, dated 19 Dec 02,
                w/atchs, (Applicant’s letter, dated 16 Dec 02).

                                   

AFBCMR 02-02362

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to xxxxxxxxxxx, be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 18 Sep 01.